BC 2007 10 15 Regular - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

October 15, 2007 (Regular Meeting) Page 572 This item was tabled until the November 19, 2007 meeting. (E-2) Report by the County- Attorney on Possible Actions with Regard to Commissioner Privette Chairman Carruth reported the Board took action at its meeting on September 29, 2007, to receive a report from the County Attorney on what actions could be taken concerning Commissioner Privette. Richard M. Koch, County Attorney, reviewed the charge given to him by the Board at the agenda work session held on September 9, 2007 and presented the following information: This memorandum is in response to the vote of the Board requesting me to advise the Board on possible official actions by the Board against Commissioner Privette as a result of his recent conviction of six counts of misdemeanor aiding and abetting prostitution. As the members of the Board are already aware, a sitting county commissioner cannot be removed from office as a result of being convicted in court of a misdemeanor criminal offense not involving his office as a county commissioner. (N.C. Const. Art VI, Sec. 8) Since this Board does not ha members in this circumstance, its privileges or emoluments of the would be scrutinized carefully by likelihood, a decision to deny emoluments would be overturned. ve the power to remove one of its ability to deny or restrict the elected office of commissioner any court if challenged. In all or restrict the privileges or The privileges or emoluments of office are those perquisites which are incident to holding the office, whether implied from the office or expressly granted by statute or policy of the Board. For example, a commissioner cannot be barred from attending a board meeting, because he is required by statute to attend meetings. Likewise, if the Board by policy pays compensation to commissioners for their service while in office, all commissioners must be paid that amount. The Board has no authority to decrease one commissioner's compensation for his service to the Board, regardless of his actions in his official capacity or his personal life. This would also apply to the Board's travel policies. The Board cannot make a separate travel policy for one commissioner, but it can choose not to appoint a commissioner as its representative to a conference, seminar or event to which all commissioners are not invited or generally go. In a similar way, if it is the policy of the Board to .appoint commissioners to serve on boards and committees of other organizations or to serve as a liaison to County departments, boards or municipalities within the County, removing one commissioner from service in any capacity from all such entities would probably be viewed as denying that commissioner one of the privileges or emoluments of office. All other commissioners are allowed or encouraged to serve - denying one commissioner this opportunity would probably be disallowed if challenged. However, the Board could change the appointment itself, because it has the inherent right to decide whom it appoints to what board or committee or as liaison. Many times a Board appoints a commissioner to a board or committee or as liaison because of a special expertise dr interest a commissioner has. Conversely, a Board has the right to remove a commissioner or not to appoint him to a position because of a determination that he lacks the capability to effectively serve or even because he could not effectively serve in that position because of past events or circumstances the board feels would hurt that commissioner's effectiveness in that position. This right would be limited to the statutes, rules or bylaws of the board or organization to which a commissioner has been appointed. For example, if a commissioner's existing appointment is for a term of years, then the commissioner cannot be removed before the expiration of the term, unless the applicable rules permit